Archived from groups: alt.games.coh (
More info?)
Thus spake Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net>, Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:05:21 -0500,
Anno Domini:
>Nostromo <nostromo@spamfree.net.au> looked up from reading the entrails
>of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
>>Thus spake Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net>, Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:52:49 -0500,
>>Anno Domini:
>>
><snip>
>>The refresh change is a standard DirectX API no doubt, so it's *supposed* to
>>allow apps to change it. Nothing strange there. It's why Win98 *doesn't*
>>allow it, even though it's *known* to be less secure/protected/32-bit than
>>XP, that is the *real* mystery here. I'd say you're just lucky that your
>>desired end justifies the means in this case Xocyll...
>
>The problem here is it's not allowing an application to change how it
>refreshes full screen, it's changing the global setting, and it DOES NOT
>REVERT when the app stops.
>
>XP even allows a windowed mode application to change the refresh rate,
>and that's just plain WRONG.
>
>As far as I can tell the main difference is that win9x uses variable
>refresh rates depending on the resolution - it always uses the best
>refresh that the hardware can support while XP uses a fixed refresh rate
>regardless of what the hardware can support and there's not even an
>option to use the adaptor default anymore.
>[Once again, new MS OS, and old options are removed because MS has
>decided it knows what you want better than you do.]
>
>Under 98se, the OS puts the refresh back to the best supported by the
>hardware no matter what an app does. CoH changes it (or tries to) and
>the OS determines what should be used depending on the hardware - this
>is how it's supposed to be.
>Just tested - turned on the monitors refresh notifier - there is no
>change under 98se when CoH is started, the OS disallows the change.
>
>With XP though, once an app changes the refresh XP just shrugs and says
>"OK, whatever." and leaves the refresh changed.
>And there's no way to stop it other than running a 3rd party app to put
>it back.
>
>I'll have to boot to XP at some point and see if refreshlock actually
>locks it or just changes it back after XP lets random apps change
>hardware settings.
It locks it for all apps for a given resolution. It's tiny, it's free & it's
worth putting up with to have an OS which imo is head & shoulders above 98SE
what else can I say to convince you? ;-) (I actually load it at start up now
as I play all games in my native win res i.e. 1024x768 32-bit @ 85Hz - that
may change with my new 19" 8ms LCD I get soon of course
))
>>>>Keep in mind, it's been almost a year since you've had issues like that. CoH
>>>>has been patches many times & so has XP & drivers. Might be worth another
>>>>swing...?
>>>
>>>No it hasn't been almost a year Nossie. I didn't try playing under XP
>>>till maybe 3 months ago.
>>>I first installed it ONLY to be able to cave my settings in COH, then I
>>>rebooted back to 98se and played - because XP crashed.
>>>Patches come, patches go, CoH under XP crashes.
>>>Drivers come, drivers go, CoH crashes under XP.
>>
>>So it's marginal hardware/drivers somewhere - *has* to be. If noone else (or
>>very few ppl) are consistently getting these issues, then apply Occam's
>>razor mate. XP is not to blame, but given this is one of the main games/apps
>>that you need to work, the effect is exacerbated & amplified in your mind.
>>Even if you have common, name brand h/ware, short of replacing every single
>>part, 1 by 1, you'll never know until you overhaul the entire system.
>
>I'm not the only one for whom CoH crashes under XP, it seems to be
>fairly common. I'm forever seeing posts in the forums, and broadcasts
>in game from people who crashed out and have re-entered, i've also
>teamed with such.
I'd still say it's a small percentage - either that or you're the vocal
minority X ;-)
>The hardware is identical for XP and 98se, and i'm doubting that ALL the
>drivers under XP are faulty.
>Occam's razor says it's XP itself.
Yeah, but which *bit*??? That's the crux of the matter surely!?
>>Case in point: a previous company I worked for had a PC in a staff shop blow
>>power supplies & mobos about a half-dozen times. We replaced the power
>>supply; then the mobo; put surge protectors in straight away; replaced video
>>card/hard disks. Have a guess what is was in the end? Bloody cd-rom drive
>>shorting in some sort of strange loopback circuit.
>>
>>>I haven't tried under issue3 because I haven't had any problems under
>>>98se. All the 98 issues got fixed.
>>
>>Cool.
>>
>>>>I agree. It might be worth a 2nd pass if you have a spare partition/disk.
>>>>Mind you, install XP from a formatted disk. DO NOT upgrade from 98 whatever
>>>>you do!
>>>
>>>It's still installed Nossie, and it was always installed in parallel.
>>>I see no reason to actually boot to XP these days, when it's less secure
>>>and less stable than 98se.
>>
>>You're talking CoH only here of course...or do you get issues under XP with
>>other apps?
>
>A couple other games that won't run under 98se have also crashed.
>One of them also locked XP solid. Yes, as in hard-reboot necessary.
>As I said, so much for this secure OS.
ah heck. I've only had 1 or 2 occurrences with that sort of thing in over 2
yrs & it was related to old ATI video drivers (or bad new ones which were
fixed within days) both times.
>MS still doesn't understand what a sandbox is and still lets
>applications access things they aren't allowed to in a proper sandbox.
>
>>>I'll use XP for things that won't run under anything else.
>>
>>Not too many of those luckily for you ;-)
>
>There's a few and there will be more eventually.
>Until that time, there's no need to "upgrade" a functional system.
Only Freedom Force for me, but I can live w/o. Anyway, that was me
'rebellious' period of 2 month May-June last yr when I thought I could live
w/o CoH
>That's the bottom line, I won't upgrade because MS has decided it's time
>to sell me another OS version, I'll upgrade when I *NEED* to and not one
>picosecond earlier.
>I stayed with 95 till I got a game that could not install much less run,
>under anything less than 98 (Mech Commander 2), because *MY* 95 system
>was rock solid and dependable.
>
>Maybe, just maybe, for people who let MS decide what their settings
>should be, the newer MS OS's will be more stable.
>But these are the same people who have bought into MS's "reinstall the
>OS every 6 months" nonsense. The people who reformat their harddrives
>when reinstalling in the hopes this will "fix" problems.
Hey, MS have given me some of the best free software I've never owned, so I
can't really complain now can I? >;-)
>[As an aside, at one point when I was dealing with NCPlay's tech
>support, one of their drones asked "when was the last time you
>reformatted and reinstalled" - the idiocy has become so ingrained that
>tech support expect it/suggest it as a fix.]
LOL! Yeah, not an endearing question from tech support.
--
No matter how many times you save the world, it always manages to get back in jeopardy again.
Sometimes I just want it to stay saved! You know, for a little bit?
I feel like the maid; "I just cleaned up this mess! Can we keep it clean for... for ten minutes!"
Replace 'spamfree' with the other word for 'maze' to reply via email.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram